Moderation Issues (3)

Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.

4,124 thoughts on “Moderation Issues (3)

  1. Gregory:
    “If you are referring to OPs, then Lizzie, through her admins, reserves the right to editorial control.”

    Who is ‘Lizzie’? She is reserving nothing, no rights, no control. This place was at least tolerable with fuzzy Lizzie, who didn’t want it to become what it has: a sewer of discontentment for anti-IDists atheists and agnostics. That was not the ‘best case scenario’ by far, which is probably why she doesn’t care about TSZ anymore.

    Carry on then with your empty ‘skeptic’ authority, Alan.

    I’m betting that Lizzie will return before Jesus.

    And a LPT from one guy to another: My wife and daughters assure me that women generally don’t consider “fuzzy” to be a compliment.

  2. Wow, really? Who’da thunk that. Me not complimenting that confused music-architecture-cogsci-apostate self-whirlpool of (gotta deny that too!) nihilism Elizabeth Liddle for THIS site? What a surprise! (Ah, you moderate, and thus expect compliments … and impoverished ‘skeptic’ respect.) Quick tip: most men don’t consider ‘fuzzy’ to be a compliment either, if you’re busy misinterpreting intentionally. 😉 It wasn’t meant as a compliment for the ‘fuzzy logic’ of the person who built this wretched dehumanising site (sociologists watch both objectively and subjectively, in this case, learning to protect against ‘skeptic’ dehumanisation).

    Please tell your wife and daughters, who you brought into the conversation, that despite what their husband and father says: “the [intentionally] empty spiritual life is not worth living”. What it feels like to escape from a materialistic (or even just naturalistic) ideological prison is not something you can know about unless you’ve done it. Perhaps someone you know could imagine that feeling.

    Time to flip the atheist switch? Grow a heart, etc.

  3. Gregory,

    Time to flip the atheist switch? Grow a heart, etc.

    A more shining example of the spiritual joys attendant on escape from this ideological prison, one would be hard pressed to find.

  4. Dump the dehumanising, uninspiring worldview ‘skepticism,’ Allan Miller, and you’d likely also see the other side, the joys of which you have blocked out of possible experience ‘strictly ideologically.’ It’s really not that difficult for most ‘normal’ human beings around the world to understand this, no matter what age from young adult onwards! Suction-souled adult USAmericans are a sociological phenomenon extraordinaire in ‘western’ social history, with shadows of the ‘decade of ME’ still over-hanging. This site is a hoot of hollow thought (starting with your favourite TSZ disenchanting & self-admitted disenchanted philosopher), in far too many ways! 😉

  5. Gregory, I just wanted to tell you that I think you’re a really nice person, never shy from extending goodwill or the gesture of a hand of friendship. And you’d always much rather look for the best in people rather than the worst, and you go out of your way to tell people what you like about them rather than what you dislike.

    Just kidding of course. Your every post reeks of the contempt you feel for us. Rest assured that, due to how you behave and the way you post about us, the feeling is mutual.

  6. I forgot there was a reason I blocked that person. The hidden anger is obvious given what it recently wrote, which was more a threat at me (and of course, I had not addressed it in the message) than an ideologically upset atheist whimper now. Put the sweetest sugar niceties & lipstick thick on that worldview of despair and pump it up as ‘friendlier-than-the-theist communication’. No surprise that ‘normal’ people who don’t suffer from anti-religious paranoia find that worldview both numbing of soul & culturally distasteful.

  7. Gregory, why don’t you tell us how you really feel? Every sentense has that strange quality of being muffled. There’s more in there, just open up and be honest. Give us all you’ve got, no reason to hold back.

  8. Allan:

    A more shining example of the spiritual joys attendant on escape from this ideological prison, one would be hard pressed to find.

    The Freedom from Religion Foundation should hire Gregory as a spokesman — for Christianity.

  9. phoodoo writes:

    But his posts have substance, so its ok, right Alan?

    Its all part of the guerilla skeptic handbook.

    First, please keep discussion of moderation issues in this thread.

    Second, what is your problem?

  10. Seriously, Patrick. You don’t have to try to trump FMM. He is in a league of his own. His trash is enough to ruin any thread. You don’t have to reinforce it and add to it.

  11. Patrick:
    The rules require you to assume other people are posting in good faith. You are calling John a liar here. I suggest you apologize and retract your accusation.

    Please abide by the rules or your comments will be moved to Guano.

    I want to go on record as saying that I think Patrick is being unfair to FMM.

    Everyone here knows that FMM’s peculiar version of presuppositionalism logically requires him to say that everyone believes in God, whether they know it or not.

    If FMM were better at written communication, he could say, “it is my belief that you believe in God, even though you don’t believe that you do.” And that would be both a sincere expression of FMM’s position and also would not get into any trouble with The Rules.

    Unfortunately, FMM is not good enough at written communication to express himself with that degree of clarity. But it’s unfair for him to be punished just because he’s not good at expressing himself, especially when everyone here already knows what he thinks.

  12. Kantian Naturalist: Unfortunately, FMM is not good enough at written communication to express himself with that degree of clarity. But it’s unfair for him to be punished just because he’s not good at expressing himself, especially when everyone here already knows what he thinks.

    That is a very generous interpretation.

  13. Kantian Naturalist: Unfortunately, FMM is not good enough at written communication to express himself with that degree of clarity. But it’s unfair for him to be punished just because he’s not good at expressing himself, especially when everyone here already knows what he thinks.

    He’s not willing to believe a person who disagrees with his unsupported bullshit beliefs. That’s clearly not meeting the criterion of meeting such a person on the level of good faith.

    Whether or not such egregious BS is something to be allowed is another question. Obviously some like disagreeing with him, even though I’m less and less inclined to do so, but those who like arguing with him might prefer letting his BS get by for the sake of having a chew toy.

    Glen Davidson

  14. Erik:
    Seriously, Patrick. You don’t have to try to trump FMM. He is in a league of his own. His trash is enough to ruin any thread. You don’t have to reinforce it and add to it.

    He enjoys bullying FMM, just as he did bullying you.

  15. newton: That is a very generous interpretation.

    FMM’s claim that everyone believes in God is, because it’s based on meanings of various terms that nobody else shares, pointlessly obfuscating. But it’s not bullying, as patrick’s posts are. FMM is silly; Patrick is a shmuck.

  16. walto: FMM’s claim that everyone believes in God is, because it’s based on meanings of various terms that nobody else shares, pointlessly obfuscating. But it’s not bullying, as patrick’s posts are. FMM is silly; Patrick is a shmuck.

    I have no firm convictions about Patrick’s suitability for moderator, but I agree with Walto on this specific point. FMM thinks that everyone believes in God because he insists on using words in ways that no one else here does. That’s annoying but it’s not a violation of The Rules.

  17. walto: FMM’s claim that everyone believes in God is, because it’s based on meanings of various terms that nobody else shares, pointlessly obfuscating. But it’s not bullying, as patrick’s posts are. FMM is silly; Patrick is a shmuck.

    I agree the fmm and Patrick are not equivalent.However given that people have endlessly pointed out the ridiculousness of claiming he knows better than you do what you believe, it is pretty schmucky behavior as well.

  18. Kantian Naturalist: I have no firm convictions about Patrick’s suitability for moderator, but I agree with Walto on this specific point. FMM thinks that everyone believes in God because he insists on using words in ways that no one else here does. That’s annoying but it’s not a violation of The Rules.

    Since Patrick only warned fifth it seems that he agrees it is only a “venial sin”. Again ,no matter how you idiosyncratically you use words if you are fully aware after numerous discussions of how the vast majority of the English speaking world perceives the meaning of your statement, it seems reasonable to assume the annoyance is intentional.

  19. newton: I agree the fmm and Patrick are not equivalent.However given that people have endlessly pointed out the ridiculousness of claiming he knows better than you do what you believe, it is pretty schmucky behavior as well.

    I agree that it’s childish and annoying, if that helps.

  20. newton: Luckily for me, childish and annoying are in my wheelhouse.

    Is that yours? I’m right next door in the confused and annoying wheelhouse!

  21. Kantian Naturalist: I want to go on record as saying that I think Patrick is being unfair to FMM.

    Everyone here knows that FMM’s peculiar version of presuppositionalism logically requires him to say that everyone believes in God, whether they know it or not.

    If FMM were better at written communication, he could say, “it is my belief that you believe in God, even though you don’t believe that you do.”And that would be both a sincere expression of FMM’s position and also would not get into any trouble with The Rules.

    Unfortunately, FMM is not good enough at written communication to express himself with that degree of clarity. But it’s unfair for him to be punished just because he’s not good at expressing himself, especially when everyone here already knows what he thinks.

    Here’s what John and FMM wrote:

    John Harshman: Let me note that I am not mocking and scorning god, as I don’t believe there is such a person.

    Of course you are and of course you do

    John stated that he is “not mocking and scorning god”. While I consider both of FMM’s clauses to be violations of the good faith rule, it is the first that I consider more egregious. FMM is claiming that John is lying about his intention. He provides neither evidence nor reason to support that insult. It is a gross violation of the rules.

    Further, although I agree with you that FMM is poor at communicating, I don’t think he is unable to clarify his meaning. Rather, I think he is incapable of understanding that his beliefs are just his beliefs. His childhood indoctrination has damaged him severely. While sad, that is no excuse for allowing him to abuse others.

    I’ve been pretty lax about Guano’ing comments lately. I’ve reached out to Lizzie and asked her to share her intentions for the site going forward. In the meantime, I think a very light touch is the best option. I warned FFM in this case because I think the rule about assuming good faith, at least until there is reason not to, is a good one. I don’t want quality participants like John dissuaded from commenting because of unwarranted, irrational abuse from someone like FFM.

    I sincerely appreciate you raising your concerns.

  22. Here’s the full context of what John wrote, where he makes his meaning quite explicit:

    Let me note that I am not mocking and scorning god, as I don’t believe there is such a person. I’m not even mocking and scorning you. I’m mocking and scorning your beliefs. And they deserve it.

    FFM clearly violated the rule about assuming good faith.

  23. Erik:
    Seriously, Patrick. You don’t have to try to trump FMM. He is in a league of his own. His trash is enough to ruin any thread. You don’t have to reinforce it and add to it.

    SIWOTI complex. I admit that it is a character flaw. I need to meditate more.

  24. Erik: And post less. Just stick to guanoing and notifications about it.

    Thank you for your suggestions. I will give them all the weight I feel they are due based on your contributions here.

  25. Patrick: Thank you for your suggestions.I will give them all the weight I feel they are due based on your contributions here.

    You noticed that everybody of any weight here harbors outright disdain for you, based on your worth, which happens to consist of character flaws. You can keep ignoring it, but it won’t go away as long as you display your character flaws. My suggestion is sincere, practical and workable for you. When you don’t post, it’s as if you were normal, much better.

  26. Patrick: You think of yourself as having weight?How cute.

    Are insults worthy of the character of a mod? Is littering of threads and bullying worthy of the character of a mod?

    These are rhetorical questions. If you answer that these things are not against the rules, you are simply proving the point that you enjoy ruining and disrupting the atmosphere of the site and you lead others by example to do the same.

    Someone with an appropriate character would not be facing such questions. The only good thing to say about you is that you are consistent. Consistently failing, that is.

  27. Erik: Are insults worthy of the character of a mod? Is littering of threads and bullying worthy of the character of a mod?

    I’m writing as a participant, not as an admin. That you would be unable to separate the two roles is a reflection of your character.

  28. Patrick: I’m writing as a participant, not as an admin.That you would be unable to separate the two roles is a reflection of your character.

    So all the ghastly bastardliness that you do here, you do as a non-admin, and that’s okay because you are, in your own mind, able to separate those roles. How cute.

    Well, at least you proved my point, so I should not be too disappointed.

  29. Erik[addressing Patrick]: You noticed that everybody of any weight here harbors outright disdain for you,

    Why, thank you, Erik.
    I’ve been working out.
    🙂

  30. Erik: So all the ghastly bastardliness that you do here, you do as a non-admin, and that’s okay because you are, in your own mind, able to separate those roles.

    According to my parents’ marriage license and my birth certificate, I came into the world at least a few months after they tied the knot. Be that as it may, I appreciate a good assonance as much as the next guy. “Ghastly bastard” I can own.

    And yes, it’s easy to separate the roles unless one is an authoritarian.

  31. Patrick: I’m writing as a participant, not as an admin. That you would be unable to separate the two roles is a reflection of your character.

    “Unlike others, I just am not susceptible to conflicts of interest. Better person, I guess.”

  32. Patrick: And yes, it’s easy to separate the roles unless one is an authoritarian.

    Great stuff, patrick. Says a lot about your character. As we can see, “non-authoritarians” (hahaha) believe that conflicts of interest only affect lesser mortals. Never holy libertarians who can just…..rise above. Nice.

  33. Mung:
    walto, if Patrick ever rises above being an ass let me know.

    Mung, I’m in the bar of the Westin right now. Stop by. If you can’t find me, I’ll be the one your girlfriend is checking out when she thinks you’re not looking.

  34. “Dear, did you see the drunk, homeless guy masturbating with a whip cream can under the tables at the Westin tonight? I really tried not to look, but the way he kept slamming that orange Trump doll into the chocolate fountain was so annoying.

    And the smell…”

  35. Patrick: Mung, I’m in the bar of the Westin right now.Stop by.If you can’t find me, I’ll be the one your girlfriend is checking out when she thinks you’re not looking.

    Wow.

    That’s incredible.

  36. Kantian Naturalist:

    Mung, I’m in the bar of the Westin right now.Stop by.If you can’t find me, I’ll be the one your girlfriend is checking out when she thinks you’re not looking.

    Wow.

    That’s incredible.

    Do you have any male friends, KN?

  37. That’s incredible.

    Do you have any male friends, KN?

    He is not your pimp.

    Find your own playmates.

  38. phoodoo:
    “Dear, did you see the drunk, homeless guy masturbating with a whip cream can under the tables at the Westin tonight?I really tried not to look, but the way he kept slamming that orange Trump doll into the chocolate fountain was so annoying.

    And the smell…”

    See, Mung? Even phoodoo gets it. That’s a pretty low bar to clear.

  39. Patrick:

    Mung, dude, you really suck at this male bonding thing.

    Mung,

    If Patrick is as good looking as he says, you’re missing out on some hot “male bonding” tonight.

    You can always repent in the morning, like a televangelist or a Republican congressman.

Comments are closed.